I am a Protestant who wants an honest answer

[Philthy]

exrc:

If you have done these both, then this is good. However, when you start to deny the gift by faith, and turn to works for further justification, you believe another gospel, and another Jesus.
Sorry Dan. I believe and confess AND I call on the name of the Lord. Who’s preaching a different gospel? Better look in the mirror buddy…

exrc:

I am astonished that you are

so quickly deserting the one who called you by the** grace** of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, 7which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 1:6-9)NIV
Are you serious? Is this your best shot? Don’t you think I could fling this back in your face and say “See, Dan, your faith is in a false gospel.”? Now I would never do that - only the self-righteous would feel comfortable doing such a thing. “Judge not that you yourself are not judged.”

exrc:

know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ.!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 2:15)NIV

Dan this is getting rediculous. Do you think I’m Jewish or something? Is there faith apart from deeds?

exrc:

1. I would like to learn just one thing from you PHIL: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard?

3Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?.!.(Letter to the Roman Catholics 3:2-3) NIV
Dan, the law is irrelevant. I recieved the Spirit by Grace. That was the BEGINNING - just like Paul says. Not the beginning and the end.

exrc:

Please get on track Phil, before it’s too late.

Your friend Dan!

Thanks Dan

 

[Philthy]

Ozzie:

Let me try to explain again. The sacrifice of Christ was efficacious in and of itself, irregardless of whether or not anyone subsequently believed in Him.

Completely? With respect to forgiveness? If you answer yes to both of these, then why ins’t everyone ACTUALLY forgiven all their sins?
1a) Nothing is lacking - all are going to Heaven
1b) Nothing is lacking - you must believe and then your sins are forgiven but I dont consider that anything lacking. Christ’s sacrifice is still completely “efficaciuos” independent of faith even though it doesn’t accomplish it’s goal of ACTUAL FORGIVENESS independent of faith.

Ozzie:

For instance, “propitiation” is one of the doctrines of the cross. It has nothing to do with you or me, it is strictly between the Father and the Son. The Man, Jesus Christ, i.e., His sacrificial work on the cross, is the propitiation for the sins of the world (1 Jn. 2:2; 4:10). His blood sacrifice “propitiated” God, that is, completely satisfied God’s offended holiness because of the world’s sin.

Very good. Lets go back to FORGIVENESS. You are saying that Christ was the worlds propriation and that this was accomplished at the crucifixion - correct? But no sins are FORGIVEN because of this - right?

2a) False all sins are forgiven due exclusively to the propriation
2b) True sins are not forgiven due exclusively to propriation

part1 of 3…

 

[Philthy]

QUOTE=Ozzie]

When God saw the blood He was appeased. Our faith had/has nothing to do with producing this divinely, intended effect. His blood was completely efficacious in respect to propitiating God. In fact, it was God Himself who sent the Son into this world to be the propitiation for our sins, and His blood sacrifice was the means by which this would be effected. And “propitiate” He did, completely, perfectly and once-for-all. God never looks to you or me to appease, or satisfy, His offended holiness because of sin, or even when we sin (this would include confessing them). His offense, even wrath, toward sin was appeased completely and perfectly 2000 years ago through the shed blood of Christ there on the cross.

Now this same sacrificial principle applies to reconciliation and redemption, the other two doctrines of the cross. Irregardless of anyone subsequently believing in Christ or not. His sacrificial work, there on the cross, was **sufficient **to produce divine reconciliation for all sinners, and their eternal redemption, i.e., to eternally purchase any sinner from the slave market of sin by the ransom price of His blood. One’s belief in Christ has NOTHING to do with the efficacy of this glorious, sacrificial work.

Like I said - we disagree on the term efficacy. However you want to say it, with respect to FORGIVENESS OF SINS, that didn’t happen COMPLETELY 2000 years ago for all of humanity. If it did no one would be going to hell plain and simple. Let me quote James Akin - a favorite of yours I’m sure:

"One may say that although the sufficiency of the atonement is not limited, its efficiency is limited. This is something everyone who believes in Hell must acknowledge because, if the atonement was made efficacious for everyone, then no one would end up in hell. The difference between the atonements sufficiency and its efficiency accounts for Paul’s statement that God is “the Savior of all men, especially those who believe.” 1Tim 4:10 God is the Saviour of all men because he arranged a sacrifice sufficient for all men. He is the saviour of those who believe in a special and superior sense because these have the sacrifice made efficacious for them. According to Aquinas, “[Christ] is the propriation for our sins, efficaciously for some, but sufficiently for all; but it has its effect only on the elect.”

2 of 3

 

[Philthy]

Ozzie:

We do not share in its sufficiency what-so-ever!!

This makes me think you don’t read my stuff - I’ve repeatedly and consistently stated in no uncertain terms that the atonement was perfectly and completely sufficient for the forgiveness of every sin for all time.

Ozzie:

The one who puts His faith in Christ simply becomes a beneficiary of His perfect, complete and efficacious work on the cross at the time of personal faith. Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency (now don’t come right back at me by saying that’s not what you said. Think about this awhile, please!).

Please don’t use the word efficacious - one or both of us is using it incorrectly. “Simply becoming a beneficiary” in no way should be thought of as not TRULY COMPLETING CHRISTS WORK ON THE CROSS. I can’t believe I’m the one forcing this issue. you are making faith sound like its nothing.

Ozzie:

His sacrificial work on the cross was completely and perfectly propitiatory, reconciliatory and redemptive in and of itself. That is the nature of a SUBSTITUTIONARY sacrifice, which Christ’s was! Our faith IN HIM does not give it its propitiatory, reconciliatory or redemptive power - His substitutionary sacrifice, intrinsically, has that power because that was its divine purpose, its divine intent. But by GRACE we receive from God, gift wise, the full eternal benefits of divine salvation (eternal reconciliation to God and redemption, the forgiveness of our sins) wrought by His Son’s sacrificial work on the cross 2000 years ago (Eph. 2:8-9).

You forgot to include “through Faith” in your lengthy discourse. It’s important because Faith may or may not happen. If it does then Christs sacrifice actually has it’s COMPLETE effect with respect to FORGIVENESS. Otherwise NO. That doesn’t mean that Christ could have done anything more - it just means that what Christ did, APART FROM SOMETHING ELSE (Faith), does not accomplish it’s complete purpose.

QUOTE=Ozzie]

The cross is “good news” my friend. That’s why it’s called “good” Friday.

Of course Ozzie - thats why Catholics rightly display “Good Friday” with their crucifixes. Can you believe some would even be so intent on defaming the Catholic Church that they would find something wrong with this? Amazing isn’t it? I’ve heard some suggest that an empty Cross somehow has more meaning. I don’t think so - not that I would criticize something of that nature. However, if someone wanted to truly represent the Resurrection then an empty tomb would be the way to go. What exactly does an empty Cross mean? Christ was never there? He’s dead and buried? All crucifixes were eventually emptied of the temporary inhabitant - only one bore Christ and that represents the greatest day ever. You really should choose your battles more wisely.

I did enjoy your summary very much -

Phil

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

This man understands nothing regarding the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ as revealed in Scripture. There’s no such notion in Scripture as a transformation for salvation. Such teaching denies the cross of Christ.

1COR. 1:2 “to the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:”

1COR/ 6:11 “And such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God.”

HEB 2:11 “For both He who sanctifies and those who *are sanctified *are all from one Father; for which reason He is not ashamed to call them brethren,”

HEB 10:10 "By this will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all."

It is the saved who have been sanctified in Christ.

Ozzie,

You have done a good job quoting the scriptures that use sanctification and justification in “the past tense.” You realize that there are plenty of verses that use the “present” and “future” tenses as well. Unlike you, most Protestants will argue that sanctification is a process. I find your position on sanctification to be somewhat bizarre.

If you believe there is nothing transforming for salvation then you fail to understand the difference between “the natural man” and the “spiritual man.” If you believe that there is nothing transforming than you fail to comprehend the meaning and power in Romans 12:1-2 where we read, “I APPEAL to you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” If you do not believe that there is a transformation than you do not believe Paul when he says in Titus 3:5, “he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy,** by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,”**

If you do not believe that sanctification is a process and you do not believe that we are transformed than you do not believe Paul when he says in 2 Corinthians 3:1, “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.”

If you do not believe that we are transformed then you do not believe or understand what it means to be born again and you have no idea what the grace of God is all about. I will repeat for you one of my favorite verses of scripture concerning God’s grace.

Isaiah 55:11
“…so shall my word be that goes forth from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it **shall accomplish ** that which I purpose, **and prosper in the thing ** for which I sent it.”

 

[Pax]

Ozzie:

We do not share in its sufficiency what-so-ever!! The one who puts His faith in Christ simply becomes a beneficiary of His perfect, compete and efficacious work on the cross at the time of personal faith. Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency (now don’t come right back at me by saying that’s not what you said. Think about this awhile, please!).

Ozzie,

I will say it instead. No one including Phil has made any statement to the effect that “Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency”

Why do you twist another’s statements this way? Creating caricatures and strawmen is no way to argue a point. You merely weaken your own position by doing this. Moreover, you are merely avoiding a straight up approach to answering Phil.

 

[Coder]

It’s so clear from Jesus, St. Paul and James that faith is not a verbal statement. It is a life lived. Faith is doing - feeding hungry, loving, being merciful and kind.

It’s so obvious it’s silly.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

This is not hard to understand. Throughout the Bible it is made so very clear that our actions will speak to the reality of our faith.

When the Bible says believe and be saved, it means enter the life that Jesus wants you to lead:

This life requires faith, love, and actions. None of these can be separated. You can’t have faith without love. You can’t have faith without actions. Your actions must be loving (read St. Paul).

Folks, this is not hard to understand. Pages and pages of debate about this is truly ridiculous. One has to wonder if those who debate these clear and simple concepts are merely trying to be difficult and enjoy attempting to frustrate people.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

 

[Coder]

1 Cor 1:1 Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, to the church of God that is in Corinth, to you who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be holy, with all those everywhere who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.

Yes, Ozzie, it is a powerful message of hope, no question. It does even seem like a guarantee:

1 Cor 1:8 He will keep you firm to the end, irreproachable on the day of our Lord Jesus (Christ). God is faithful, and by him you were called to fellowship with his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.

As we all know, to understand the Bible, you must include other Scriptures such as the scripture that warns against sin that can lead to loss of salvation and Jesus’ warning that not everyone who calls Him Lord will enter the kingdom. Therefore this is not a guarantee but a powerful message of hope.

Note also what Paul says here Ozzie:

1 Cor 1:1 …with all those everywhere who call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours.

**1 Cor 1:10 **I urge you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree in what you say, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and in the same purpose. … Is Christ divided?

So you see Ozzie, in the very same chapter, Paul says it is unacceptable for there to be divisions among Christians.

 

[Pax]

Coder:

It’s so clear from Jesus, St. Paul and James that faith is not a verbal statement. It is a life lived. Faith is doing - feeding hungry, loving, being merciful and kind.

It’s so obvious it’s silly.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

This is not hard to understand. Throughout the Bible it is made so very clear that our actions will speak to the reality of our faith.

When the Bible says believe and be saved, it means enter the life that Jesus wants you to lead:

This life requires faith, love, and actions. None of these can be separated. You can’t have faith without love. You can’t have faith without actions. Your actions must be loving (read St. Paul).

Folks, this is not hard to understand. Pages and pages of debate about this is truly ridiculous. One has to wonder if those who debate these clear and simple concepts are merely trying to be difficult and enjoy attempting to frustrate people.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

Coder,

You are right. It is both simple and obvious.

 

[WhatIf]

1. I’m not really asking how Ozzie interprets it. What is the actual quote from the Bible?
2. I don’t think that anyone would say that Jesus was referring to His own flesh when He says that it profits nothing, but I may be wrong.
Lisa

I’m just learning how to post comments etc., so I hope I’m putting this in the right spot to respond to JesusFreak16.

I wanted to ask you if you have considered the Bible’s accuracy. What I mean is, how do you know that you can trust your Bible? We believe it is the Word of God. However, it is a collection of books, so how do you know that each book belongs in the Bible since it was made by men. Do you know the origin of the Bible?

I am a fairly new Catholic and part of what helped me to become Catholic is meeting people who had logical explanations for why I should accept the authority of the Catholic Church. Let me know if you find out that the books of the Bible were originally compiled by anyone other then those of the Catholic Church. I don’t know my history that well, but it seems to me that everyone, whether Catholic or Protestant has to be thankful to the Catholic Church at least for the Bible, even though the authors of each book were inspired by God. So, I believe you are right for trusting the Bible, but in doing so, aren’t you putting a lot of trust in the early Catholic Church? Have I been misled or did some other Church compile the books of the New Testament that have been used for hundreds of years? If you learn that the Catholic Church is responsible for compling the books of the Bible, then, shouldn’t it be trusted for its interpretation as well?

I am so happy that you recognize Holy Communion as the Body and Blood of Jesus. I hope your journey leads you to the Eucharist. The Bible says that those who eat his flesh and drinks his blood will have everlasting life. Isn’t that awesome?

 

[Coder]

WhatIf:

If you learn that the Catholic Church is responsible for compiling the books of the Bible, then, shouldn’t it be trusted for its interpretation as well?

Sorry, that statement is too logical.

Don’t you know this is the “no logic allowed” thread.

 

[exrc]

Philthy:

Sorry Dan. I believe and confess AND I call on the name of the Lord. Who’s preaching a different gospel? Better look in the mirror buddy…

Look again Phil, who is Paul addressing here you or me? Who is striving to stay justified, me or you?

Are you serious? Is this your best shot? Don’t you think I could fling this back in your face and say “See, Dan, your faith is in a false gospel.”? Now I would never do that - only the self-righteous would feel comfortable doing such a thing. "Judge not that you yourself are not judged

Was Paul being self righteous when he wrote this letter of correction to the Galatians?

Dan this is getting rediculous. Do you think I’m Jewish or something? Is there faith apart from deeds?

I hope you believe that you are a true Jew Phil. I do!
A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. 29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man’s praise is not from men, but from God. Romans 2:28-29

** Did you know that Jesus was a true Jew ?** But not because he was born of natural descent.

Dan, the law is irrelevant. I recieved the Spirit by Grace. That was the BEGINNING -

So did the Galatians, but they strayed from the Gospel as you do.
What made Jesus the perfect sacrifice? It was the law, he obeyed it 100%. The law is perfect Phil, in love and in justice, because God made it complete. There is nothing that has to be added to it. Everything in it was there to perfectly justify ones self if that were possible.

Phil as I’ve said on another thread, there are two ways theoretically to be justified, and have eternal life. The two however are opposites, only for the purpose of justification. They are:
(FAITH or WORKS)

1)BY WORKS- Obey the law perfectly, like Jesus, and obligate God to give you eternal life based on the fact that he would have no reason to deny you this right. You have satisfied his justice. We both know this impossible, right? (this is by law)
2)BY FAITH-Believe that Jesus earned eternal life for you because of his own righteousness from obeying the law, and trust in his righteousness to be imputed to you. Exchanging his righteousness for your sins, through his substitutionary atonement on cross**.(this is by grace**) All your works at this point become fruits of your salvation, not a means to it.

I don’t think you know what the law is Phil. That’s why I asked you to define it. I’m starting to believe that you really aren’t as honest as I thought you were.

Define the law Phil. If you do not, then you are definetely being dishonest.

Your friend Dan.

 

[exrc]

Cubby:

I appreciate your intentions Dan. Thanks for the encouragement, but even though I don’t think I’ll ever lose faith in the Catholic doctrine (but I am going to read through the Catechism and question everything!).

Try this one: see if you can reconcile 2027CCC with the definition of Grace being unearned, unmerited favor of God.

I do appreciate seeing things from another angle. The Catholic church is as close as I can get to the era of Christ, here in 2004. Not only that, but my whole being (body & spirit) is at peace with my relationship with Christ through the Catholic church. I am convinced that it’s the church Christ founded - and it may look different to you if you go back and visit after being out for a while

You may want to find out the meaning of the word church ( ekklesia) from its Greek origin. Also remember you are Roman not catholic.

Either way, I hope to see you in Glory!

I’m afraid I won’t see you there cubby, because the RCC has condemned me with over 100 anathemas. Here is just one which should be enough to do it. Canon 3 of the council of Trent.

Your friend Dan!

 

[exrc]

Coder:

It’s so clear from Jesus, St. Paul and James that faith is not a verbal statement. It is a life lived. Faith is doing - feeding hungry, loving, being merciful and kind.

These are works not faith. Faith can only be seen by God. Our faith is demonstrated to other humans by means of works.We are what we believe. Faith is belief only. Works are faith acted out. " faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see." Heb 11:1
It’s so obvious it’s silly.

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.”

Only his children can do the will of their Father, and he** knows** them. These people he says he ,** never** knew. He will never say this to his children, because he has already adopted them into his family.Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God-- 13children born not of natural descent,3] nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. John 1:12-13

Folks, this is not hard to understand. Pages and pages of debate about this is truly ridiculous. One has to wonder if those who debate these clear and simple concepts are merely trying to be difficult and enjoy attempting to frustrate people.

What is the reason Paul writes to the Galatians? If you can answer this question correctly you will win the grand prize and find the answer to your question.

exrc

 

[exrc]

Pax:

Ozzie,

You have done a good job quoting the scriptures that use sanctification and justification in “the past tense.” You realize that there are plenty of verses that use the “present” and “future” tenses as well. Unlike you, most Protestants will argue that sanctification is a process. I find your position on sanctification to be somewhat bizarre.

Sanctification is the stage that we are at after being already justified completely. Transformation is the process by which our souls are conformed to the character of Christ, within the stage of sanctification. Our spirit man is already as righteous as it can be. John 3:6

How is this accomplished?

1. He causes suffering- to purge us of our pride, so he can speak to us.
   2)He answers prayer- to build our faith
   3)He gives blessings- to assure us of his love,and devotion to us

Why? To be useful vessels of God! The great commission Mat. 28:19

If you believe there is nothing transforming for salvation then you fail to understand the difference between “the natural man” and the “spiritual man.”

No Pax, You, fail to understand the cross!

If you believe that there is nothing transforming than you fail to comprehend the meaning and power in Romans 12:1-2 where we read, "I APPEAL to you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed

by the renewal of your mind, For what Pax?Your own quote**-" that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect."**not to merit salvation.

If you do not believe that there is a transformation than you do not believe Paul when he says in Titus 3:5, “he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy,** by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,”**

Not for the purpose that you suppose,which is for being justified.

If you do not believe that sanctification is a process and you do not believe that we are transformed than you do not believe Paul when he says in 2 Corinthians 3:1, "Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. And we all, with unveiled face, beholding the glory of the Lord, are being changed

into his likeness from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit."
Where does it say that we will be justified from this?

If you do not believe that we are transformed then you do not believe or understand what it means to be born again and you have no idea what the grace of God is all about. I will repeat for you one of my favorite verses of scripture concerning God’s grace

It is you who do not understand the purpose of being born into God’s family.He does not divorce his children Pax, ever! That is a sick god, and it is the one you have chosen to worship.

Your friend Dan!

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

You only believe those parts of scripture that please you.

To the contrary, my friend, I quote those Scriptures that explain salvation by grace through faith alone, yes, even the faith of the believer who is “His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus FOR good works” (Eph. 2:8-10). You, on the other hand, completely avoid those passages and present only those which seem TO YOU to deny the sufficiency of divine GRACE which is in Christ Jesus. You know, that list of verses you keep in your breast pocket close to your heart?

And yes, we have thrown an enormous amount of scripture at you. In fact it may be enough scripture to actually establish the general context of the NT.

Actually, enough to totally deny the general context of the N.T., being the substitutionary nature of Christ’s cross and the sufficiency of divine GRACE wrought by the efficacy of that once-for-all sacrifice.

But back to John 3:14-18…Beyond that these verses are written in the context of baptism and being born again.

The first part of John three certainly speaks of the need for one to be born again (regenerated), but it says nothing about being baptized (Rome errors with that interpretation). Yes, being “born again” is regeneration and regeneration is being made alive in Christ Jesus, having been dead in Adam and in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:5)(QUOTE]The one who believes walks in the light and in truth and is saved. The unbeliever, willfully rejecting the truth, is already condemned. The two most important things in this Chapter of John’s gospel are being born again and believing in Jesus. The depth of understanding this in its fullness is where Catholic teaching exceeds most Protestant thought.Actually, the understanding of the depth of this is where RC’ism utterly fails. I asked for your exposition of Jn. 3:14-18 and you danced around it because you can not handle the grace truths Christ is emphatically declaring in those verses. That whoever believes in Him will NOT PERISH but HAVE eternal (everlasting) life. That the divine purpose for sending the Son into the world was that the world should be saved through Him (vs. 17), i.e., His efficacious, substitutionary sacrifice on the cross, which is applied, in full, to the believer at the time of personal FAITH in Him. Just as the Israelite looked to the elevated, bronze serpent and lived, so the sinner, this side of the cross, who by faith looks to the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ, shall not merely live, but possess ETERNAL life. Why? Because by that efficacious sacrifice the believer is forever redeemed and forever reconciled to God, to the glory of the Son. For this reason, he who believes “is not judged” but HAS eternal life. Contrary to your chronology above, it is the saved man who first believes unto salvation and then walks in the light and truth of that salvation. Regeneration causes the saved to understand and readily accept the things freely given to him by God through Christ (1 Cor. 1:12), such as the truth Christ declares in Jn. 3:14-18. He doesn’t search the Scriptures to try to prove God wrong, taking Him out of context.

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

You have denied that faith is a gift which is contrary to scripture and contrary to every denominations understanding of faith from scripture.

Can you show me in Scripture where it says faith for salvation is a gift? Please don’t refer to 1 Cor. 12:9, it is obvious by the context that Paul is not referring to “salvation faith” there. Otherwise you would have to conclude that the other gifts of the Spirit are given to unbelievers.

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

You have done a good job quoting the scriptures that use sanctification and justification in “the past tense.” You realize that there are plenty of verses that use the “present” and “future” tenses as well. Unlike you, most Protestants will argue that sanctification is a process. I find your position on sanctification to be somewhat bizarre.

Most Protestant theologians agree that “experiential” sanctification is progressive, but not *“positional” *or “ultimate” sanctification. I quoted in my previous post the Scriptures that speak of the believer’s “positional” sanctification, those Scriptures that show that all believers are now sanctified IN CHRIST. “Sanctified” means being “set apart.” It doesn’t mean “becoming sinless,” but as a “holy” object “set apart” for divine use. When one believes in Christ unto salvation he is “set apart” IN CHRIST. Thats why Paul in Scripture addresses believers as “saints” (def. “holy ones”). An object is “holy” because it is set apart" for divine purposes. Like the objects in the Temple were “holy,” “set apart” from common use to be used to serve the living God.

“Experiential” sanctification has to do with the saved one’s daily walk in Christ, his yieldedness to God. Hence, it is related to a Christian’s spiritual growth (1 Pet. 3:18), not salvation. This is the constant exhortation toward believers in the Epistles, to walk worthy of the calling with which they have been called (Eph. 4:1), i.e., their positional sanctification in Christ. And certainly this is a progressive transformation, and by that definition, become more “sanctified” (set apart). In fact, this is what Paul means in Rom. 12:1-2 regarding the setting aside of the believer’s body as a living and “holy” sacrifice, as an acceptable sevice unto God. And his mind not being conformed to this world’s values or ideologies, but transformed by the truth of God’s Word (see also 1 Thess. 4:1-7). However, “experiential” sanctification does not effect the believer’s “positional” sanctification which already his, IN FULL, being IN Christ Jesus (1 Cor. 1:2, 30-31; 6:11; Heb. 2:11; 10:10).

“Ultimate” sanctification is related to the believer’s final perfection which is his forever in glory, after the translation or resurrection of the body: *“For our citizenship is in Heaven, from which we also eagerly wait for a Savior (not to be saved), the Lord Jesus Christ; who will transform this body of our humble state into conformity with the body of His glory, by the exertion of the power that He has even to subject all things to Himself” *(Phil. 3:20-21). We will no longer have to “grow in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ,” and our sanctification in Christ will no longer be just our position, but then our actual, eternal, glorious condition. This is the ultimate transformation. As the Apostle John says, “Beloved, now we are the children of God, and it has not appeared as yet what we shall be. WE KNOW that, when He appears, we shall be like Him, because we shall see Him just as He is” (1 Jn. 3:2; cf. Col. 3:4). It is all guaranteed by the cross.

 

[cynthia]

Dear Lisa, (Jesusfreak)

I am a Catholic and I love your soul and do want what is best for you and your soul so I must be painfully, but honestly blunt with you my precious friend. I want you to have the fullness of the faith, I want you to have “ALL” the sacraments of the church, not just one or two (baptism/matrimony). Your chances of sanctification/salvation are so much greater if you embrace the one and true church of Catholocism. Catholisim will offer you seven beautiful sacraments that give special graces to assist you in your sancification. Namely, the Holy Eucharist or the Body and Blood of Christ received in Holy Communion. Sweet Jesus said, “unless you eat of my body and drink of my blood there is no life in you”. Come home, God loves you so and wants you to share in the richness of truth in the Catholic church.

May Our Lady guide you and may the Holy Spirit enlighten you.

 

[Ozzie]

Pax:

I will say it instead. No one including Phil has made any statement to the effect that “Our faith in Him does not make His sacrificial work “efficacious,” as if it is our faith that puts a stamp of approval on it, or gives it its potency”

You’re mistaken! That is exactly Phil’s position! He argues that Christ’s work on the cross is NOT totally efficacious UNTIL one believes, i.e., efficacy is dependent on man’s belief. Bottom line, if no one believes then His work on the cross was not efficacious. He utterly fails to comprehend, to grasp, the nature of a substitutionary sacrifice. Or better, he refuses to allow the truth of it to grasp him. And based on the overall, legalistic theology you have posted on this thread, so do you! And based on RC’ism’s sacerdotal/sacramental religious system, so does it.